Introductory physics students' recognition of strong peers: Gender and racial/ethnic bias differ by course level and context

TL;DR

This study investigates gender and racial/ethnic biases in peer recognition among introductory physics students across different course levels and contexts, revealing that course level influences gender bias and that racial/ethnic biases can favor underrepresented backgrounds.

Contribution

It uniquely examines how course level and instructional context affect gender and racial/ethnic biases in peer recognition in remote physics courses.

Findings

Course level correlates with gender bias in recognition.

Racial/ethnic biases sometimes favor underrepresented students.

Recognition patterns differ between lecture and laboratory contexts.

Abstract

Researchers have pinpointed recognition from others as one of the most important dimensions of students' science and engineering identity. Studies, however, have found gender biases in students' recognition of their peers, with inconsistent patterns across introductory science and engineering courses. Toward finding the source of this variation, we examine whether a gender bias exists in students' nominations of strong peers across three different remote, introductory physics courses with varying student populations (varying demographics, majors, and course levels). We also uniquely evaluate possible racial/ethnic biases and probe the relationship between instructional context (whether lecture or laboratory) and recognition. Some of our results replicate previous findings (such as the the association of course grade and small class section enrollment with nominations), while others offer contradictions. Comparing across our three courses and the prior work, results suggest that course level (whether first-year students or beyond-first-year students) might be more associated with a gender bias in peer recognition than other variables. Surprisingly, we also find instances of racial/ethnic biases in favor of students from backgrounds historically underrepresented in science. Finally, we find that the nomination patterns differ when students nominate individuals strong in the lecture material versus laboratory material. This work serves as an important step in determining which courses and contexts exhibit biases in peer recognition, as well as how students' perceptions of one another form in remote teaching environments.